While most Americans are focused on the endless circus surrounding Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, a drama of earth-shattering importance is playing out behind the scenes. Most people seem to assume that we don't have to be concerned about Barack Obama anymore because his second term is scheduled to end in a few months, but the truth is that an absolutely critical decision is in his hands right now. Both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have said that they will not support a proposed UN Security Council resolution that would formally establish a Palestinian state, that would set the parameters for the new state, and that would grant them East Jerusalem as their capital. So at this moment there is a tremendous amount of international pressure on Barack Obama to support such a resolution, because the U.S. veto power on the UN Security Council is the only thing standing in the way of formally dividing the land of Israel. I wrote about this in August, in September, and now I am writing about it again in October. If Obama is going to do this, it needs to happen by January 20th, 2017, and so for the next few months we are officially in "the danger zone".

On Thursday, the New York Times editorial board added their voice to the growing chorus of those calling for a "parameters resolution" in a piece entitled "At the Boiling Point With Israel"…

The best idea under discussion now would be to have the United Nations Security Council, in an official resolution, lay down guidelines for a peace agreement covering such issues as Israel's security, the future of Jerusalem, the fate of Palestinian refugees and borders for both states.

In the article, the New York Times editorial board also strongly endorsed the U.S. State Department's recent condemnation of Israel's plan to build new housing units in the West Bank.

I have included the official State Department statement on this matterbelow. Just like Barack Obama did at the UN recently, the State Department referred to Israel's presence in the West Bank as an "occupation"…

We strongly condemn the Israeli government's recent decision to advance a plan that would create a significant new settlement deep in the West Bank.

Proceeding with this new settlement, which could include up to 300 units, would further damage the prospects for a two state solution. The retroactive authorization of nearby illegal outposts, or redrawing of local settlement boundaries, does not change the fact that this approval contradicts previous public statements by the Government of Israel that it had no intention of creating new settlements. And this settlement's location deep in the West Bank, far closer to Jordan than Israel, would link a string of outposts that effectively divide the West Bank and make the possibility of a viable Palestinian state more remote.

It is deeply troubling, in the wake of Israel and the U.S. concluding an unprecedented agreement on military assistance designed to further strengthen Israel's security, that Israel would take a decision so contrary to its long term security interest in a peaceful resolution of its conflict with the Palestinians. Furthermore, it is disheartening that while Israel and the world mourned the passing of President Shimon Peres, and leaders from the U.S. and other nations prepared to honor one of the great champions of peace, plans were advanced that would seriously undermine the prospects for the two state solution that he so passionately supported.